Opinion

Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.

  • 1 Cal. 3d 93
  • 81 Cal. Rptr. 592
  • 460 P.2d 464
  • 1969 Cal. LEXIS 195
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 7, 1969
Status
Published
Author
McCOMB
On the bench
Traynor, McComb
Cited by
261 cases

finding that securities action was direct suit because “[i]t is clear from the stipulated facts and plaintiff's allegations that she does not seek to recover on behalf of the corporation for injury done to the corporation by defendants. . . . Thus, the gravamen of her cause of action is injury to herself and the other minority shareholders.”

How later courts described this case

  • finding that securities action was direct suit because “[i]t is clear from the stipulated facts and plaintiff's allegations that she does not seek to recover on behalf of the corporation for injury done to the corporation by defendants. . . . Thus, the gravamen of her cause of action is injury to herself and the other minority shareholders.”
  • holding that majority shareholders are fiduciaries with respect to minority shareholders and hold their "powers in trust”
  • holding a plaintiff may bring a direct suit 23 against the corporation and its majority shareholder, even though the majority’s actions harmed 24 the company’s value
  • holding that a suit against majority shareholders for decreased value of stock not derivative

Written by the judges who cited it.

Distinguished

  • Distinguished by Speirs v. BlueFire Ethanol Fuels CA4/3, 243 Cal. App. 4th 969 (2015)

    93, 108 [81 Cal.Rptr. 592, 460 P.2d 464]), but these authorities are plainly inapplicable to warrant holders.
    California Court of AppealDec 21, 2015Read it
  • Distinguished by Oakland Raiders v. National Football League, 32 Cal. Rptr. 3d 266 (2005)

    of reasons, Jones is inapposite.
    California Court of AppealJul 28, 2005Read it

The opinion

McCOMB, J.

I dissent. I would affirm the judgment in favor of defendants for the reasons expressed by Mr. Justice Shinn and Mr. Justice Moss in the opinions prepared by them for the Court of Appeal in Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co., (Cal.App.) 76 Cal.Rptr. 293 .

The petition of the defendants and appellants for a rehearing was denied December 10, 1969, and the opinion was modified to read as printed above. Coughlin, J. pro tem., * sat in place of Mosk, J., who deemed himself disqualified. McComb, J., was of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

Assigned by the Chairman of the Judicial Council.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.